- From: Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu>
- Date: Fri, 24 Oct 2014 09:50:18 +0200
- To: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
- Cc: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
On Fri, Oct 24, 2014 at 05:56:37PM +1100, Mark Nottingham wrote: > > Thus I think that we should define 3 "models" to test in fact : > > - the "average" one as you describe above > > - the "browser" one with a single custom header out of the 10 > > - the "partner" one with 9 out of the 10 custom headers > > > > That way we can see if one model shows an important deviation using one or > > another encoding. In my opinion, an adequate encoding (I mean a safe one > > for the future) should be reasonably good on all cases and show limited > > variations around the average model. > > > > Once we're able to synthetize the requests for a given model, it's easy > > to build the two other ones, so think it should be done. > > > > Opinions ? > > Sure, with the proviso that actually interpreting what's a useful difference > is still undefined, and likely to cause some debate. Sure, but I think it's not a big issue, because : - if we find important differences, there should be a rought consensus for the best solution - if there's no noticeale gain, that means it's best not to change a iota. And at least I hear that the persons less interested in changing are in this thinking so that should not be a problem. > But let's go ahead and try, since the cost is relatively low. I'll write some > Python this weekend (possibly tonight, subject to family stuff) to generate > some header sets; if other folks can do the crunching code and have it ready, > that'd be much appreciated. Great. I unfortunately cannot build deflatehd, I'm still trying to figure why it fails while the rest is OK. > Unless I hear otherwise, I'm going to do HTTP/1 style header sets separated > by double-newlines; e.g., > > :scheme: https > :authority: foo.com > :path: /abc > foo: bar > > :scheme: http > :authority: bar.com > :path: /def > baz: bat > > and so on... Looks fine, it's how I've been handling headers as well till now. > I'll put it in a repo for inspection / pulls. Whoever does the other code > should as well. Does anyone have an encoder which can be easily extracted from his/her implementation and be fed with many requests like this ? It would save a significant amount of work. Cheers, Willy
Received on Friday, 24 October 2014 07:50:54 UTC